Pages

Saturday, 26 March 2011

In the midst of dealing with my father-in-law's fall and subsequent stay in hospital, I almost missed reading an email from an old friend and fellow member of Wargame Developments – Nick Huband – about his play-test of THE PORTABLE WARGAME rules. The following part of his email is reproduced with his permission:

'I've been following your chessboard wargames with a great deal of interest, there's a peculiar charm about a game in such a small space, reminiscent of a miniature painting.

Anyway, coming to the point, I dug out a piece of mdf that was 450mm square, sprayed it up and gridded it. Last night I tried out your Frontier/Musket rules with my 1839 Turks & Egyptians using a scenario loosely based on the Battle of Homs in 1832.

The game ran well and the rules were quite clear. One thing that struck me was that combat was very bloody with the cavalry on both sides pretty well wiping each other out early on. Artillery was pretty lethal too. I was wondering whether the introduction of some sort of saving throw might ease this a little. If 5 or 6 was thrown for a unit under fire or a 4, 5 or 6 for a unit in close combat then the unit is not destroyed but is pushed back one square, possibly with a loss in combat power next turn?'

Nick has made some interesting observations, and I will give his suggestions some thought, although the ideas I am currently working on will – I think – deal with the problems he has identified.

Besides his email, he also sent me some photographs of his battle, and I have reproduced them below with his permission.

I must admit that the board that he has made does make the whole thing look much more like a wargame, and is very much in keeping with the game's Morschauser 'roots'.

What a delightful and professional looking game. My hat is off to Nick.

When I bought a few RCW figures, I thought about a winter setting but baulked at the thought of doing 48 sq ft of winter terrain for a side project. A small RCW portable board done in this manner with patches of snow would be the perfect solution ( albeit not quite as neatly and effectively if past experience is any guide .)

Both Nick and another of my Wargame Developments friends have both produced very simple but also impressive gridded boards that they have 'painted' by giving the MDF a light 'dusting' of spray paint from a distance. The patches of colour on the original brown MDF break up the monotone finish and give it a more realistic 'look'.

A very handsome board - bigger units do look better. I settled on twenty strong units for my five inch hexes, but they are the very opposite of portable. The nice thing about increasing the number of figures is that you can improve the aesthetics without changing gameplay.

Care needs to be exercised however, myself and General Du Gorman were discussing making a Command & Colours Napoleonics board on a floor with two foot wide offset squares. We could field units sixty strong then!

What Nick Huband has achieved has given me pause for thought. The board he has produced is simple but very effective, and the larger number of figures per Unit increases the aesthetic appeal of the game no end.

By the way, I am given to believe that someone has already gone down the route of larger hexes and more figures per unit … so your alcohol-fuelled ideas are not so ridiculous after all!

I guess you know when you're a real wargamer when merely the sight of troops on a board set the wheels inside your head in motion. Every time I visit your blog, or Mr. Farrow's, or Ross's, I start thinking, "Hey, I could do that!", followed quickly by, "Then what's stopping me?!"

Glad to see things are better on your end, and that you still have time to find a little solace in the land of little tin men.

Nick's game looks splendid. We used to meet regularly to play kriegsspiel with Bill Leeson. Perhaps one could develop a sort of tactical Kriegsspiel-Lite using a separate gridded board for each player and an umpire?

I tend to agree with his comments about combat being too bloody - unless one wants a very quick game - and also don't like seeing armies reduced to next to nothing, when in reality casualties of 'only' 15-25% were suffered by losing armies in black-powder era battles.

Rather than go down the route of saving throws, however, I'm thinking of portraying a unit's Combat Power by the number of individually-based officers, musicians, colours &c., which would be removed/placed in a different sequence to indicate loss of CP. That way, units would continue to look like bodies of troops, rather than skirmishers or fugitives!

I'm not sure about push-backs: I think either a unit fails to close and halts for a protracted exchange of fire, or it will retire - in good order or in rout - back to, or even beyond, its start position to rallly/reform.

If I've had to put in all the effort of painting the men, I want to see them on the table!

I also get a renewed enthusiasm from visiting other people's blogs ... especially the two that you mention. They both show what a wargamer can achieve within realistic limits of time, space, and money.

Any escape from 'reality' helps to revive one's lagging spirits ... and I find that the world of wargaming is a great way to escape.

I think that I have mentioned before that I am thinking of both changing the combat results to make them slightly less bloody (possibly by introducing a 'pin' result as a midpoint between 'no effect' and 'destroyed') and using a mixture of multi and single figure bases to record a Unit’s decline (as Richard Borg apparently does in his one 'Battle Cry' games). I think that these two changes might provide an answer to the problems you have outlined.

At present I do use a 50% casualty limit for my battles (i.e. when an army is reduced to 50% of its starting strength it must retire from the battlefield). I have not included this in the present draft of the rules, but may do in the next draft … if I ever get time to write it!

Pages

The First Rule of Wargaming and the Spirit of the Wargame

The First Rule:

‘Nothing can be done contrary to what could or would be done in actual war.'

- From 'The Rules of the Naval War Game' by Fred T Jane

The Spirit of the Wargame:

‘Wargames are played, for the most part, without the supervision of an umpire. The game relies on the integrity of the individual players to show consideration for other players and to abide by the rules. All players should conduct themselves in a disciplined manner, demonstrating courtesy and sportsmanship at all times, irrespective of how competitive they may be. This is the spirit of the wargame.’

- Adapted from 'The Spirit of the Game' in 'The Rules of Golf' as published by the R&A Ltd.

About Me

I have been wargaming for as long as I can remember. One of the first toys that I was bought was a wooden fort that was garrisoned by assorted lead soldiers ... and I have never looked back!
The first wargames book I bought was CHARGE! (although I had taken out [and repeatedly read] Donald Featherstone's WAR GAMES book beforehand [and many thanks to John Curry for republishing it!]).
My first 20mm figures were the good old Airfix Guards Infantry and Band (in shocking pink!), soon followed by others as they were released, and by 1968, when I bought my first metal Hinton Hunt 20mm figures, I had a large collection of World War II figures, tanks, guns, and aircraft.
I was a founder member of WARGAME DEVELOPMENTS and have been the treasurer and membership secretary ever since. I have also organised – along with Tim Gow - the annual conference (COW – Conference of Wargamers) for the past ten years.
My main interests are wargaming any wars from 1850 onwards, although I have a special interest in Colonial, the Spanish Civil War, and World War II wargaming.
I also have a special interest in wargames that use square or hex grids for movement and weapon ranges.